GM should (still) kill the Corvette

7/14/2009 11:06 AM EDT

You make a good point, Corvette is the one GM brand that has kept its identity very clear. So, according to your reasoning it should be the only GM brand that deserves to survive. It is OK if you hate it, but for lack of good reasons you should talk about something else.

7/14/2009 11:35 AM EDT

I think your all wet!!Why drive Foreign Sheet metal when you can drive a True American Sports car and have economy too??
http://www.corvettevalley.com/showpost.php?p=138014&postcount=3

7/14/2009 11:39 AM EDT

So GM should have a reasonably-priced sports car to appeal to a younger (and presumeably less-affluent) market segment? Hmmm...sounds like the Solstice/Sky. But, wait, GM killed Pontiac and Saturn and kept Buick...

I've owned Chevys (Chevy II, Vega, Impala) and Pontiacs (Phoenix, Fiero) but I would never buy a Buick...you couldn't give one to me. GM's inept management killed the wrong line if they were trying for a reasonable three-tiered product offering. They should have killed Buick and kept Pontiac.

7/14/2009 11:46 AM EDT

So GM should have a reasonably-priced sports car to appeal to a younger market segment? Hmmm...sounds like the Camaro.
Affordable sports cars are a very real market. Some prefer the fast/furious honda's etc. that sound like really fast lawn mowers. Others like the traditional American muscle car. Would you argue that that market is no longer relevant?
Corvettes are likely very profitable because they offer high-end sports car performance at a price point that is very competitive vs. its peers.

7/14/2009 12:15 PM EDT

Many will buy GM products in the future because the products are made by GM. Our great grandfathers bought cars by the same GM (assuming it is the same GM).

GM is composed of its products and its history. Much of GM's historical value (product tradition and continuity) has been mismanaged and lost forever. Corvette is an exception. It was beautifully impractical and exciting at introduction and remains so.

I was a teenager living in Detroit when it was introduced. I never bought a Corvette but the fact that it still exists and hasn't morphed into something else enhances all GM products for me.

You can't say that about the Ford Thunderbird or very many other such badges.

The Corvette is your window into GM's imagination and evidence of its continuity. Without it there would be scant evidence General Motors still exists outside its executor, Obama Motors.

7/14/2009 12:49 PM EDT

GM kept Buick not for the benefit of domestic (US) consumers, but for the benefit of the Chinese. Buick is a huge brand in China, and canceling it would kill GM's cash cow. Get used to it people - China is the biggest market in the world for just about anything, the US is becoming progressively more irrelevant. With time our vaunted military will become either unaffordable or obsolete, and our military and financial muscle will become atrophied :(

7/14/2009 1:16 PM EDT

Morry you sound like all the other douche-bag Porsche owners who spend twice as much for their cars to only get half the performance. Quit your whining and quit trying to cover the fact that you spent all that money for half the performance.

I heard it all before...blah blah blah the Corvette is plastic, the Corvette is American, the Corvette is old technology. Usually its from someone like you who reads and believes everything they see in magazines like Road and Track where the bias is clearly anti American in regards to automobiles.

So when you take your Porsche to get your $650 tune up, $150 oil change, and $1200 brake job remember that all that money is being spent on a much "better" car.

I will see you later...in my rear view mirror.

7/14/2009 1:25 PM EDT

At this point in GM's life, the decision to keep/kill the Corvette should be based on whether it makes the company money, and whether it will continue to do so in the future.

7/14/2009 2:07 PM EDT

I never post to these blogs, but this one is so bad that I must post a response.
This is the worst article I've ever read in the EE Times. The logic is flawed and not well thought through, and it appears to draw conclusions based on hearsay and "conventional wisdom" despite facts which directly contradict its claims. The absence of data to support arguments was a glaring omission. Several other responses have pointed this out such as the fact that the Corvette actually gets better gas millage than the majority of the GM vehicle fleet. So why is the author so focused on this one specific car?

First off, the author writes for the EE Times, not the Auto Marketing Times, so I think it is rather naive for him to take a position of superiority in passing judgment on automotive marketing calls. But the article comes exactly off like that. I don't know where he got the random Cadillac quote or the context of the full conversation that quote came out of, but that is a one off exception, yet it is presented as the way all marketers in GM think. Weak. I am very suspicious of the context of this quote, as you should be too.

Next, the author complains about the push rod engine and jumps immediately to killing off the car that uses that engine. Where is the logic in that? Actually, that engine is used in multiple GM vehicles (Trailblazer SS, Camaro, and the Corvette). Why wouldn't one suggest changing the engine in the Corvette instead of killing the Corvette, unless the engine isn't his real agenda here?

This entire article came off as follows: He wants to kill the Corvette, so he went on a hunt for something to hang that argument on. He picked the push rod engine. In doing so, he chose to ignore fundamental factors in the efficiency of a car: gas millage, weight, coefficient of drag, emissions, etc. No data was provided to support his assertions, hence it was left to common sense. But, as I pointed out above, multiple responses already punched holes his push rod argument.
The best response I read so far pointed out that the author complained about the lack of brand image, but he wants to kill of the one GM vehicle that has strong brand image. Amazing. This author has lost all credibility with me on any of his future articles. Next!

7/15/2009 3:41 AM EDT

What is this? Road & Track now? Since when has The Enquirer concerned itself with product line management for automobiles? Morry, you have no idea of what you are talking about, so you might want to stick to your day job of rephrasing and spellchecking automotive electronics firms' PR instead of getting on your soapbox here THREE times to bash a horse that doesn't deserve dead-horse-kicking treatment. The Corvette, and cars like it DO NOT pull though family car sales, and for you to even suggest it as a criterion for a vehicle's viability puts you squarely in the clueless-as-a-marketer category. The Corvette is a technology pilot, much like the S-class is for Mercedes - a place where technology is exercised in a production environment and where the limits of design and materials are explored. Your focus on pushrods as being low tech is asinine, baseless, and naive. My 2001 Corvette gets 32 MPG with the a/c off, does 1G on the skidpad, has a 170MPH top speed, and hits 60MPH from a standing start in 4 seconds. That kind of performance gets you 12MPG from Germany or Japan. My engineering marvel has titanium mufflers, thinned window glass, and carbon fiber transverse leaf springs to reduce weight, as well as spun cast magnesium wheels to reduce unsprung mass, a technology only available from one vendor on the planet it was so advanced. It has an alternator on it that does not look like a repurposed slot car motor, meaning it has a better design margin than its Japanese counterparts. Corvettes were featured with HUD technology from Hughes and with an active damped magnetorheological suspension. Most recently, the Blue Devil Corvette model generates over 600HP in one of these "low tech" aluminum block V8 engines - a RELIABLE, low maintenance, proven power plant with an advanced supercharger design and a car that garners $50,000.00 OVER list price to give you an idea of profit margins and consumer demand. I've both built hot rodded cars and repaired cars, so I know what's garbage and what's well designed. My Mitsu went through three turbos in 60k miles because it's not made to drive hard for any extensive time - just pretty enough and jumpy enough to get off the dealer lot. Stop with the America bashing - we all need a good dose of justifiable domestic-industry lovin' in this economy right now, especially form peopole with privileged pedestals such as you are given. As of this post, it's no longer fashionable to bash American products - our international credit card is maxed out and America's engineers are still the most innovative and creative on this planet. Create American engineering jobs, don't destroy them, with your pen.

7/15/2009 6:31 AM EDT

Bad companies should be put to rest. When it comes to market interference and government intervention the US is worse than the old Soviet Union. Sure cities with big factories will take a short term hit, but better companies will take their place with better products.

7/15/2009 11:46 AM EDT

Last time I went into a retail establishment the customer was right. So if he or she wants to buy a Corvette they should be able to. The democrats want us to build and sell cars that are unsellable because people don't want them. How long can a business survive selling blue widgets when the customer wants yellow ones?????? GM has built cars that get 30+ mpg and last for 200000 miles for more than 20yrs. Why does the media continue to accept cash from foreign car makers to promote their vechiles while slamming US auto makers???

7/15/2009 1:30 PM EDT

Corvette needs to be SOLD, as it is a profitable car to produce. Some other company can make a success of it as a stand alone business.

GM is going to die. The president sold out GM for the union (against bondholders). Extracting itself from long term UAW commitments was the whole point of bankruptcy, and the sole hope for a future GM. With the union now the benefactor of the bankruptcy we have two options left for GM - a quick death or a slow and expensive bureaucratic wind down where they make politically correct cars no one wants at taxpayer expense for 10 years.

Traditional GM buyers (of which I am one) will not buy from Government Motors. And non-GM buyers will not be swayed to purchasing a Government Motors car just because they like to vote Democrat, or like the socialist model. They will continue to buy Japanese and European cars. So we'll see forced fleet purcases of the Pelosi-mobile to city/state/fed employees to prop up our local Trabant-like econocars. After a few hundred billion dollars have gone to the UAW to build those junk cars, eventually someone will shut it down. And then we'll just have a few million rusting econo-car hulks in landfills, created by an impulse of congress and the president to be environment-sensitive.

7/15/2009 4:37 PM EDT

I agree with most all of the posts. THe US finally has a world class high performance car with a huge price advantage over the imports and the M and M has the nads to take a shot at it!!!

Find something controversial to post; you are getting your proverbial clock cleaned on this one! Ah, is that a ROLEX you are wearing to go along with your 911?

7/21/2009 10:16 AM EDT

You talk about the mistakes GM has made with leveraging component, subsystem, and platform reuse across their brands. Every automotive manufacture does this. Look at Toyota / Lexus, Honda / Acura, Nissan / Infiniti, Ford / Lincoln / Mercury. That has nothing to do with this. The fundamental issue with all US automotive manufactures was that they got complacent when they owned the US market and let quality suffer. Once that perception is ingrained into the consumer base, it is extremely difficult to recover. The perceived quality of their products today still hurts them today. They must remake their image with very innovative products. The Corvette team has done that and that is why it is a successful product for Chevrolet. Why would you drop a profitable product?

7/21/2009 10:31 AM EDT

What Morry Marshall does not understand is that the Corvette brings customers into the GM show rooms! It is also the place where new technology can be tried and refined and handed down to the standard sedans. For example in 1965 Corvette added 4 wheel disc brakes, which are now an industry standard and with the C5 series they added stability control which uses accelerometers, and individual wheel braking to keep the car heading in the direction that the steering is pointing.
Several decades ago they developed fuel injection that is another industry standard and greatly reduces harmful emissions and improves milage. These are only a few of the firsts that appeared on the Corvette. The costs of inovation have been paid for by buyers of Corvettes so that the average American can have the benefits of a safer, more fuel efficient and less expensive car.

7/21/2009 10:57 PM EDT

I can't stand this anymore, I have to say my piece. Here in the land downunder, I drive a GM Commodore, it's big enough to carry 5 adults in comfort, I'd guess similar to the modern Impala. I get pretty decent fuel economy from a straightforward V6 engine considering the vehicle size and mass. And yet, I look at the current Corvette and wonder what it would feel like to be in command of one of these magnificent thundering monsters which can achieve similar fuel economy to my family sedan when driven normally - and yet, when asked to deliver the goods, leave no doubt in anybody's mind that this is indeed a machine to be reckoned with. Excuse the passion, but passion is what a Corvette is all about, the inimitable sound of an angry V8, the street cred even when they are standing still. Kill the Corvette? Not possible, go to any Corvette show in Australia - or probably anywhere in the world, you will see everything from modern beasts back to the mouth-wateringly desirable early roadsters - they may be standard, lovingly restored or wildly customised, but they are all owned and gazed upon with passion. I hope before I die, I find myself in a financial position to own a Corvette simply because of what it is. Maybe one day, the technology may be forced to change, but Morry, you headlined "GM should kill the Corvette" which suggests the model should be discontinued, so you should expect the passionate ones to vilify you for the statement. Long live the passion, long live the Corvette! Oh, and in my stable I would include: '57 Belair Sports Coupe - convertible would be nice, '63 Impala SS and '67 Camaro SS both in big block thanks - simply because of what they are. Anyway, have a good day to all readers, and keep the fires alight to the passionate ones.

7/22/2009 2:09 PM EDT

Really wrong and stupid articles are common on EETimes. IT's a leftwing, Obama fawning, Microsoft loving, money grubbing site.

7/23/2009 11:24 AM EDT

I think you are on to something with the lower priced sports car to be an entry point for young consumers. Back in my youth Chevy Novas, Dodge Dusters, Chevelles, etc... were the choice cars of kids (I had a '74 Plymouth Scamp with a 318). They were sporty and stylish with good performance; but mainly, they could be had for <$1000. These first cars start to form the mindset about vehicles that will be taken into adulthood.

Kids today are buying low performance imports and trying to squeeze performance out of them. That's not likely because of some great shift of perception that low end imports are great; it's because that is all they can afford and they are easy to work on. American cars of the last decade or so have been uninspiring and are usually a challenge to repair or modify. It should come as no surprise to Detroit (although it does) that these young consumers are going to grow up to be big import fans.

I still think the high end corvette is valuable to give the entry sports car a viable image as well as for R&D investment. The 'heritage' aspect of the 'vette would sell the entry model. Who would you rather buy an entry sports car from given an equivalent price: Yugo or Chevy?

8/4/2009 12:12 PM EDT

I own a Porsche and would rather own a Vette which I can take it to the local Chevy dealer for service and no matter where I travel can find someone that knows how to work on a Chevy V8... Anyone that looks down on the Corvette hasn't looked at the Z06 and its' impressive performance specs. European sports cars are cool to look at and drive and certainly turn heads because they are unique, but if you have a practical bone in your body, the Corvette is certainly worth considering.